atkinsje,
I find your responses disturbing, ill informed & poorly considered. I will address them in your summary.
Also more generally my post may have been misleading as I didn't mean to make the US a special case (but as the US health care system was the shifting topic why would I talk about others?).
How can you say that when you stated
We have the worst lifestyle in the world (which isn't considered in the WHO statistics) its a miracle our life expectancy is where it's at period. Altering the health care system may correct the infant mortality rate (though in reality the same number of babies would be dieing they just wouldn't get included in the numbers like other countries), but more access to health care is not going to correct lifestyle.
in your original post?
I think the WHO statics are poor for comparisons of any country (they are good for seeing progress in that country).
So how do you suggest we get comparisons, trends & projections? Like it or not there are similarities between all first world countries, & those trends can be seen through WHO reporting.
When comparing the effectiveness of medical care you have to be on even playing ground (how seriously would you take medical research that didn't have a similar patient base?),
I am assuming from this that you believe that the pathophysiology of illness/disease is different for the US than any other country. Why is it that
many medical research projects, regardless of the country of origin, collaberate to conduct sampling worldwide? Could it be that the pathophys is the same worldwide????????
I used cancer because as I said it eliminates some of the lifestyle factors.
Most cancer treatments are similar worldwide, because they follow evidence based practice. Early detection of cancer is shown to be the most important factor in sucessful treatment.
Three of top five causes of death in the US are lifestyle induced for the most part.
Interestingly the top 5 include trauma, however that aside, the per capita numbers are surprisingly similar for most first world countries, Heart Disease, Stroke, Cancer & respiritory disease. So why should the US be discounted?
Do you really not believe this alters life expectancy figures?
No, I dont, however WHO in conjunction with federal health departments worldwide can see trends & look at what stratergies for better education can be implemented to help reduce the problem.
No where did I mention that the US is superior to anyone, my only point was that the effectiveness of US health care is not as bad as the WHO stats make it out to be.
WHO set baseline standards for reporting of figures. These are the same for all countries. Where there are studies & trials being conducted, statistical allowances are made & notes are made in the statistical tables explaining the anomoly.
This all becomes a problem when people try to make the case for a national health care system by comparing us to the rest of world using WHO stats because what works there may not work here.
How do you know a nationalised socialised healthcare system wont work? Oddly enough it works in countries such as France, The UK, Aussie & many, many others. It can work. The provision of healthcare that is the same for all regardles of sociaoeconomic status will always be open for debate, but to make comments like you have, without entering into proper, considered debate, with irrational statments like you have made, is a nonsense.
